The international power of the United States in the twentieth century has been grounded in its economic strength. In 1900, even before the US had much of an army, it was perceived as a power and a future great power. By 1920 it was the supreme financial power in the world, having displaced Great Britain during the First World War. By 1945 it was virtually the only financial power, most others having been devastated by the Second World War. By 1985 it had lost its position as supreme financial power, with Japan succeeding to the crown. It had been a short but action-packed reign.

The economic power of the US, as of any country, can be difficult to pin down. Power to do what? After all, economic power is not necessarily transferable to other realms. Power exercised by whom? Does the term 'financial power' refer to private money controlled by bankers and private investors, or public money controlled by governments? Indeed, does 'financial power' exist if abundant private money cannot be directed according to government policy? Certainly these are important questions when considering American relations with Europe, because economic relations, economic aid and economic rivalry have been dominant themes.

Yet from the beginning of the century until the advent of Lend-Lease in 1940, the years 1917-19 excepted, the only American money available was private money: power arising from a government's ability to disperse cash was not at issue. It is in the post-war period, with foreign aid and contributions to multi-lateral institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, that this direct governmental pressure becomes possible. But of course, what money can also do is finance an aggressive foreign policy. But here a country needs a will to power and a willingness to accept continuing responsibilities. Only in the post-war period did the US clearly, and more or less steadily, conduct such a foreign and military policy. The fact that she could afford to do so constituted the great difference between the US and the UK, her erstwhile rival and now increasingly- dependent ally.

Clear distinctions have to be drawn, therefore, between private and public money, between wartime and peace-time, and between Europe and, for example, Latin America, where American economic power underlay its own informal empire. Within Europe itself, there are distinctions. American relations with the UK are of a different order from those with any other nation. The financial communities, for example, remained close throughout the twentieth century. On the other hand, the trading communities have frequently been great rivals. At the official level, the US saw Britain as a great rival during the whole period from 1.900 to at least 1947: thereafter she gradually took on the colouration of a dependent, a position highlighted if one looks at episodes such as the 1949 devaluation, the Suez crisis, the fight to maintain the pound during the 1960s, or the 1976 IMF crisis.

American relations with, for example, France and Germany, have been very different. For a good part of the period, Germany was either an enemy, as during both of the world wars, or a basket case, such as during the Dawes negotiations in 1924 or during the immediate post-Second World War years. Germany's economic miracle and subsequent economic power have meant that Germany could share in the burden of supporting NATO, for example, but she has become increasingly difficult to push around, and lately the American Government has sometimes found this hard to cope with.

Nevertheless, Germany since 1945 has never denied the L'S the leadership role it has craved. The same cannot be said for France, which has never acknowledged that the US had any right to tell it what to do. France in her weakness suffered from American decisions during the inter-war period, such as over the Ruhr, and there is reason to suspect that...

YOU MAY ALSO FIND THESE DOCUMENTS HELPFUL

...Power is Money; Money is PowerPower is money and money is power. There are many more examples of this
now than anytime in the past.
One of the most obvious examples is politics. Ross Perot was an unkown
multimillionaire and his money is the only reason that he made it into the
presidential election. If a man who earned a standard salary wanted to run for
president, he would have almost no chance at all unless he was backed by people
with money.
Every four years when the U.S. Presidential election is held, hundreds
of millions of dollars are spent. The more money a candidate has, the farther
he can get. Although the richest competitor doesn't always win, the president
is usually a very wealthy man. Wealth paves the road to a good education. If
the presidential candidate is rich, he either inherited it or was educated
enough to make it.
OJ Simpson's trial is another example of money changing everything. If
OJ Simpson had not been a retired professional football player, then the trial
would have been completely different. Because OJ was rich, he was able to
afford a very good team of lawyers. An average person would have had much less
of a chance at being found innocent, especially considering the weight of the
evidence. Supported by his money OJ's case became a media event.
When...

...﻿The power of money today
When people think about what they want to do with the rest of their lives they tend to think about whether or not it will make them a lot of money. Given the choice to work somewhere they love for a reasonable amount of money or somewhere they hate just to receive a big paycheck which would they choose? Many people want to live without having to struggle financially. They want a job that will help pay their bills with a little left over for fun and games. On the other hand, some people want a job where they can have fun and enjoy themselves every day without caring about how much money they make. There are specific tests that will help narrow down the search for a career or major depending on whether or not people decide to go straight to college or the workforce. When people take jobs for money without being interested in the work itself it could cause them to be upset and possibly have attitudes with customers or colleagues. Attitudes in the workplace may rub off on others making it difficult for the workers to get things done efficiently. While some employees may get angry with their job others may be happy with the money they are making. There are many people who are happy with the job they have because it pays well, but does that mean their happy with the little things in life or are they more interested in the things money can...

...world the concept of "power is essentially contested, because there are different definitions of what power 'is' and therefore how it appears or is exercised."(Axford and Browning et al., 2002). Power is spoken about and depended on in todays society, but nobody truly understands it. (Nye, 2004). Power is exercised completely different throughout the world, as each country has its own laws, morals, attitudes, beliefs, government and military interference. As a world wide definition 'Power' can be defined as a possession of control, authority or influence over others. We see this definition of power exercised all over the world on the television or in a newspaper, as the domination of one group of people over another can have detrimental affects for a country, which is then penetrated throughout the world by the power of the media. (Anon, 2008). This essay will explore the different types of power throughout the world, and how each state incorporates power in either a positive or negative way in the running of their country. It will examine the type of power in America, which will be contrasted with the type of power in European countries. It will also examine the factors in which power relies on and also how this power is exercised throughout a country, and its effect on the people of that...

...HOW TO OVERCOME MONEYPOWER AND MUSCLE POWER IN ELECTIONS ?
In many ways, India’s efforts at democracy have been an amazing success.
Despite low levels of literacy and human development, vast social divisions, and a
massive population, India has remained relatively stable, peaceful, and democratically
governed. However, due to the pressing (and often divisive) concerns of the many
demographic groups in India and the increasing distrust that the electorate has for its
leadership, major reasons for concern about Indian democracy still exist.
MONEYPOWER
According to a recent study by CSDS, money is a key factor in Indian elections.
Although the 122 candidates studied ranged from “Super Rich” to “Lower Middle” class,
All major parties preferred to back the richer candidates who could fund their own
election expense. When the relative success of these candidates is
examined, the real advantage of moneypower becomes clear. Of the candidates who
secured their deposits by winning at least one sixth of the votes, 87% were Very Rich or
Super Rich. In addition, these two groups, representing between 1-2% of the Indian
public together, dominated the elections as winners and runners-up in most cases
. Of the winners themselves, in 23 out of 24 constituencies, the seat went to a
Super Rich, Very Rich or Rich candidate. The Super Rich...

...Today I am going to talk to you all about the topics of Power and Money. A deep hunger for both Power and Money, along with mismanagement once you have them, can sometimes lead to disastrous results. Both of these aspects of one’s life are very important, and sometimes a necessity to exist. Let’s find out about the effects of lots of money and the power of business.
Let’s go back to the turn of the last century when American businesses started to develop and take shape. 1920’s was seen as a time of lots of fun and entertainment; a time to make lots and lots of money as many businesses were starting up. This was the time where a lot of people saw an opportunity to invest their money in these companies. They bought stocks in large corporations. The article, “Taking care of Business” talks about how the economy boomed during those years; about how making money and spending it became a popular pastime for many Americans. It was called the “Roaring Twenties”; a fast and furious time for businesses. The stock market had started to develop rapidly and the number of banks started to significantly rise.
You may remember that people started to give unique and special names for businesses and groups of people, such as some investors were called bulls. They had an ulterior motive to make quick money. The stock market was so popular...

...﻿University of Phoenix Material
Public Speaking Diagnostic Questionnaire
INSTRUCTIONS
Answer each of the following questions in complete paragraphs of at least 150 words.
QUESTIONs
.1 On a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 equaling love it, and 10 equaling hate it, rate your feelings about speaking in front of groups. Explain your reasons for this rating.
If I had to rate my feelings for speaking in front of an audience, I would have to say that I would give it a five on a scale from one to 10. The reason I say this is because I don’t love speaking in front of an audience, but I also don’t hate it either. I would say that I am very comfortable speaking in front of people and I feel that I do extremely well. I feel that I speak very well and I am very sure of myself when speaking in front of others. Also, just because I do have the ability to do so does not mean that I just love to be in front of an audience speaking. I don’t get nervous or feel uncomfortable when I have to speak in front of the class or an audience. So, I would have to say that I am pretty neutral on the topic, I don’t hate it and I don’t love it.
.2 What type of public speaking, if any, makes you uncomfortable?
I am not sure what typ of pulic speaking that would make me uncomfortable, because I have not had to do anything other than speak in front of an class or at work. I think if I had to decide than I would Have to say that I think if I had to speak in front of thousands of people I would feel a...

...of stabilization policy: the inside lag and the outside lag. The inside lag is the time between a shock to the economy and the policy action responding to that shock. This lag arises because it takes time for policymakers first to recognize that a shock has occurred and then to put appropriate policies into effect. The outside lag is the time between a policy action and its influence on the econ- omy. This lag arises because policies do not immediately influence spending, income, and employment.
Monetary policy has a much shorter inside lag than fiscal policy, because a central bank can decide on and implement a policy change in less than a day, but monetary policy has a substantial outside lag. Monetary policy works by chang- ing the money supply and interest rates, which in turn influence investment and aggregate demand. Many firms make investment plans far in advance, however, so a change in monetary policy is thought not to affect economic activity until about six months after it is made.
The long and variable lags associated with monetary and fiscal policy cer- tainly make stabilizing the economy more difficult. Advocates of passive pol- icy argue that, because of these lags, successful stabilization policy is almost impossible. Indeed, attempts to stabilize the economy can be destabilizing. Suppose that the economy’s condition changes between the beginning of a policy action and its impact on the economy. In this case, active policy may
end up...

...3. MONEYMoney is everything that serves as universally excepted medium of exchange or means of payment.
Functions of money:
Medium of exchange – enables people to exchange goods and services for other commodities
Store of value – at home money loses value because of inflation so it is better to deposit financial assets with a bank. Money can also be stored in other forms – securities (cenné papiry), shares, or bonds (dluhopisy, obligace). We can also invest in properties, lands, arts, jewelry, antiques or precious metals and stones.
Measure of value – it enables us to compare the value of various goods and services- 11 computers =1 car
Evolution of money
* A – Before money existed people had to use the barter system to exchange their products and services. Barter meant the direct exchange of goods.
* B – Later people used commodity money – goods, which members of the society recognized as having value – cattle, sculls, shells, feathers, salt, wine,…
* C – Precious metals, especially gold and silver (had the basic qualities as divisibility, portability, durability, and homogeneity
* D – Paper money – developed from paper receipts, that goldsmiths gave their clients as confirmation of accepting their gold for safekeeping in vaults (podzemní sejf).
* E – Fiat money – nowadays notes and coins are given...